This document discusses how social media has influenced interpersonal relationships over the last 10 years from sociological and psychological perspectives. While social networks allow people to connect online, some research has found they can negatively impact well-being by triggering feelings of inadequacy or jealousy from social comparisons. However, social networks are simply a tool and whether relationships improve or worsen depends on balancing online and in-person interactions. Both positive and negative effects on relationships have been seen, so more research is still needed on controlling interpersonal ties in the digital age.
3. Background
Develop of SNSs
Embryonic forms
The first stage (1997-2001)
The second stage (2002-)
Percentage of U.S. population
with a social media profile from
2008 to 2017
Resource from: Stasista 2017
4. Present Situation
Research finds that one in 10 people has either met their best
friend online or believes they will meet good friends on web.
(Quinn, 2017)
Internet brings various of social channels lately, yet the
relationship between each individual are increasingly severe.
However, People unwished to get close with others.
(Turkle,2017)
5. Disciplines: Sociology
Social trend
Online social network itself would not affect people’s
loneliness, however some special function and
charactertics are easily make bad influence to people.
(Burke, 2016)
Social capital
Relationships help generate social capital. (Lin,1999)
6. Disciplines: Psychology
Self-presentation is an issue due to today’s social network.
“Facebook depression”
1500 Facebook and Twitter users surveyed, 62% reported
feeling inadequate and 60% reported feelings of jealousy from
comparing themselves to other (UK disability charity)
7. Conclusion
SNS would both sides effect on interpersonal
relationship through sociology and psychology
perspective.
SNS is a tool of communication.
Get more resources via SNS.
triggers more sadness, less well-being.
How to control Interpersonal relationship is
still depends on the balance between Online
Social and in the real life.
8. References
Burke, M., Marlow, C. and Lento, T. (2016). Social Network Activity and Social Well-Being.
LIU, Y. and YING, X. (2010). A Review of Social Network Sites: Definition, Experience and
Applications. Scientific Research, 978-1-935068-18-1.
Muise, A., Christofides, E., & Desmarais, S. (2009). More informationthan you ever wanted:
Does Facebook bring out the green-eyed monster ofjealousy?. CyberPsychology &
behavior, 12(4), 441-444.
Quinn, B. (2017). Social network users have twice as many friends online as in real life.
[online] the Guardian. Available at:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/may/09/social-network-users-friends-online
[Accessed 20 Nov. 2017].
Steinfiled, C. and Ellison, N. (2008). Social capital, self-esteem, and use of online social
network sites: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 54(6).
Turkle, S. (2017). Alone together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each
Other. 3rd ed.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/273476/percentage-of-us-population-with-a-social-
network-profile/
Editor's Notes
Social network sites are those web-based services that allow individuals to:
construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system.
articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection.
view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system. (boyd & Ellison, 2007)
This Graph shows the trend in percentage of how US population take part in social media from 2008-2017. This proved SNS has become an common trend at this stage.
they suppose that directed communication is related with better feelings of bonding social capital and lower loneliness.
individual by self-presentation to improve self-affirmation are usually the most fragile.